Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 23:26:04 +0400 (MSD) From: "=?KOI8-R?Q?=E1=CE=C4=D2=C5=CA_=FE=C5=D2=CE=CF=D7?=" (Andrey A. Chernov) <ache@nagual.ru> To: terry@lambert.org (Terry Lambert) Cc: terry@lambert.org, joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org, current@FreeBSD.org, bde@zeta.org.au Subject: Re: I plan to change random() for -current (was Re: rand() and random()) Message-ID: <199610071926.XAA04826@nagual.ru> In-Reply-To: <199610071810.LAA14432@phaeton.artisoft.com> from "Terry Lambert" at "Oct 7, 96 11:10:44 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Unless you are a mathematical programmer, you are unlikely to be > able to aprehend the consequences of even a trivial change away from > mathematical standards will have. There are verifiable standards > of correctness, and each standard dictates issues of precision to > which one can trust the code. Obviously, differences after the > significant digits can be ignored for comparison -- and are, in fact, > stripped from results as the "noise" that they are. FYI, I am applied mathematic, B.S. degree. > I suggest strict adherence to standards -- mathematical standards, > not ANSI or ISO C standards -- with regard to maintaining precision > and historical implementation, as required to ensure repeatability > and trust. Current random() code is joke from mathematical point of view (but not from ANSI/ISO standards). It is why it needs fixing. -- Andrey A. Chernov <ache@nagual.ru> http://www.nagual.ru/~ache/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610071926.XAA04826>